Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Jury duty responsibility
Tv shows influence human behaviour
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Jury duty responsibility
Tv shows influence human behaviour
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
A grand jury is composed of twelve people, to determine if there is enough evidence to send an accused individual to trial. Although they may not determine if the accused individual is guilty or not, they can issue a formal document saying there is enough evidence for the prosecutor to take the accused to trial also known as an indictment. According to, Texas Politics Today, “a grand jury may return indictments simply because the district attorney asks them to.” Which in the end is not fair, because the jury may believe that there is not enough sufficient evidence, but because they feel pressured they issue an indictment.
Defending the Rights of the US Citizens: The Advantages of Jury Nullification. By: Bradyn Fix Jury nullification has been a fundamental aspect of the United States court system since the 1800s, but how does it make a difference in today's justice system? The process of jury nullification occurs when a jury in a criminal case returns a not-guilty verdict even though they believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. This means that the jury knows the defendant has committed a crime but still chooses to let them go.
According to Webster's dictionary, a juror takes an oath of allegiance to serve on a jury to determine if a defendant is innocent or guilty of a particular crime. Jurors are supposed to remain unbiased and open minded when dealing with a defendant, however some jurors do not. In the play 12 angry men written by Reginald Rose jurors 10 and 3 are examples of bad jurors because they both show heavy bias against the defendant. In the book 12 angry men jurors play a key role in whether the defendant lives.
Every American citizen should serve on a jury because it allows new ideas into the verdict and it is fair to all Americans. In Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose, Juror 11 says, “I have always thought a man was entitled to have unpopular opinion in this country. This is the reason why I came here. I wanted the right to disagree” (28). To allow all American citizens to serve on a jury, it would allow different views and ideas from other countries to be heard.
If you have been listening to recent news from the United States, you will have heard the term "grand jury" in relation to the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner. The United States is one of the few countries to have the grand jury system, although not all states use it, and their regulations vary by state. (Most people are familiar with the 12-person jury of peers who decides the guilt or innocence of a defendant by unanimous vote after deliberations that can last for hours or weeks.)
A grand jury is defined as “a panel of citizens that is convened by a court to decide whether it is appropriate for the government to indict (proceed with a prosecution against) someone suspected of a crime” (West's Encyclopedia of American Law, 2008). Typically, a grand jury will review any evidences presented against an individual to decide whether or not to press charges. Within grand juries, there are typically sixteen to twenty-three members who will decide whether or not there is probable cause or enough evidence to issue an indictment. In order for an indictment to be issued, at least twelve members of the grand jury must vote in agreement for it (West’s Encyclopedia of American Law, 2008). Instead of a grand jury, investigations
The jury comprises twelve Athenian citizens, chosen by lot, who hear the evidence and make the final decision. Athens states, "Yet, since this matter came to me for settlement, then shall my city take you in, as someone as yet free of guilt, and I shall set in place a solemn court of judges sworn to deal with homicide, from this day forth until the end of time (480-481). " This system of trial by jury was a significant development in Athenian democracy and reflected a growing belief in the importance of popular sovereignty and civic participation. By participating in the trial, the jurors were taking an active role in the administration of justice and helping to shape the laws and customs of their community. This sense of civic engagement was central to Athenian democracy, which emphasized the importance of active participation in public affairs.
The concepts of the civil jury system date back to the Middle Ages “when twelve ‘compurgators,’ essentially witnesses, were gathered together to take an oath that [a] party was honest, or to attest that they had witnessed a relevant transaction. The assumption was that God would intervene on the side of the innocent person” (Doroshow 3). These essential prejudices boil down to the belief that each individual possesses an inalienable right to defend his/her self. The Founding Fathers of the United States supported this belief.
Juror 1 (Foreman) his responsibility is to keep the jury organized outside of jury room he is an assistant football coach 2nd Juror is a bank clerk he is shy and takes time to talk with others he said that in life everyone has said “I will kill you” once in their life 3rd juror has a small business he has personal conflict with his son his son hit him and left him so he is not in the favor of boy 4th Juror a stock broker he deals with facts and logic he said that the boy don’t even remember the movie name 5th Juror work in a hospital and also live in slums 6th Juror a house painter he is happy that he don’t have to go to work 7th Juror a salesmen
Someone has to come to court because they or someone else has been wronged. As citizens of this great country we have the honor and the trust to decide fairly over someone’s case. By fulfilling this civic duty, we carry out what the Constitution has given us. We have to preserve this right by responding when we are summoned to serve. How to Prepare for Jury Duty
A group of juror comprising of 12 men from diverse backgrounds began their early deliberations with 11 of ‘guilty’ and 1 of ‘not guilty’ verdicts. Juror 8 portrayed himself as a charismatic and high self-confident architect. Initially, Juror 1 who played the foreman positioned himself as self-appointed leader of the team in which has led his authority to be challenged as his leadership style lacked in drive and weak. In the contrary, Juror 8 is seen as the emergent leader considering his openness to probing conversations while remaining calm. Implying this openness to the present, it has become crucial that a good decision relies on knowledge, experience, thorough analysis and most importantly critical thinking.
Family The 3rd Juror mention how disrespectful was his kid, and how his kid even hit him once; some other members of the jury mention how this young boy was always getting hit by his father and they said that the situation was the motive of the murder. Juror number 3 was the last one in changing his vote not because he wasn’t sure, but he wants to punish this kid making a direct assimilation that this kid is like his and need to be punished. Characters: • 1st Juror: he acts as a foreman and he is responsible to maintain the order in the room and keep everyone else in track. This is not too hard for him because he is a football coach.
No. 8: I think that the jury system we have today has its own advantages and disadvantages. For example, a jury that consists of jurors who are biased could be manipulated by ‘outsiders’ through bribery or some jurors, as we have discussed before, might have some personal prejudices/beliefs that may affect their decision making. But there are some advantages as well because the decision that is made by the jury is thought out very carefully by a group of people. Interviewer: [gathers all his papers]
I think that I would like to be on a jury and experience what is required of a juror, I think everyone should be a member of the jury at least once in their lifetime. Having to experience the juries’ duties on a civil or criminal case, in some instance would be hard. Especially in a murder case involving children or battered women. When the judge gives you direction to please disregard that statement. How can you disregard information that you have heard?
In this paragraph, the advantages and disadvantages of trial by jury will be discussed. The main advantages are that juries introduce community values into the legal process and can influence the system (Joyce, 2013); they can achieve a sense of equity and fairness without enforcing unjust laws; in addition, juries are independent and neutral (Davies, 2015). Moreover, they guarantee participation from the public in a democratic institution (Hostettler, 2004), and represent the population thanks to the randomness with which jurors are decided (Davies, 2015). On the other hand, the most important disadvantages are that jurors have no prior contact with the courts, no training (Hostettler, 2004) and therefore they lack knowledge of law, courtroom proceedings (Joyce, 2013), and lack of ability to understand the legal directions (Thomas, 2010). Moreover, they must face evidence which is highly technical (Hostettler, 2004).